tell him he has to go, you know, people like pelosi and -- it's been two weeks. like, i don't think that the man doesn't understand that if this -- if the polling goes through the floor, if it really is a sign that he has to go, i think he will go. look, his whole reason for running the first time was because he wanted to beat trump. because he thought he was the person who could beat trump. >> i'm about to hand it off to rachel but i want to thank mark, molly, and the off camera appearance by molly's canine. thanks to those of you at home watching msnbc's special coverage as president biden is dealing with these nato meetings and is moving towards a press conference at any moment. our special coverage continues with rachel, joy, and nicolle right now. good evening. we begin "the reidout" with a pivotal moment for president biden as a crisis over his candidacy engulfs the democratic

party. we're awaiting what is probably the most important media appearance in joe biden's very long political career. moments from now, he will hold a solo high-stakes news conference, his first since last month's debate fallout. it's a critical moment for not just biden but the country as well. as a growing number of democrats have called on the president to quit the race. with only a week to go before donald trump accepts the republican nomination. but questions remain over how real or loud the dump biden rebellion actually is. today, hakeem jeffries, the democratic leader in the house, said house and senate democrats are united with president biden on their agenda. still, the stakes could not be higher. biden will soon speak not just on the national stage, but also a global one. the eyes of the world are watching, but especially the american media, democrats, and donors who will be scrutinizing every word coming out of biden's mouth, and also how he says them. joining me now are my colleagues

and friend rachel maddow and nicolle wallace. thank you friends for being here. coming in early to talk about this. well, for nicolle, coming in late. rachel, i want to start with you first. the stakes could not be higher here for president biden. is there a way that there's a bar he can even clear at this point? >> yeah, it's a no-pressure moment, right, for the president because obviously, the domestic political concerns here, the question of his campaign looms in very much in the front row. this is going to be not a speech, not a one-on-one interview, but a press conference where he's going to be taking the press corps's questions. he does not know what they are in advance. he's going to have to field things standing on his own feet in real time with no teleprompter, all that. but it happens at a time when i don't think it's an exaggeration to say that, you know, the fate of the world hangs in the balance. i mean, the reason that everybody cares so much about

whether or not joe biden can win this next election is because while he's hosting this nato summit, closing up this nato summit tonight, donald trump is hosting the hungarian dictator viktor orban at mar-a-lago. while president biden was opening the nato summit, trump was at an event in florida saying, i will not protect our allies from russia. he said he told them that. and he's promising that that's what he will do in the next term. this is as russia is waging an aggressive war right now. the last time trump met with viktor orban, viktor orban walked out of the room and said what trump told him in the room is if he's elected, the united states will switch sides in that war and will abandon ukraine. and so this, as a press conference at the close of the nato summit, obviously, this is important in terms of what's happening with president biden being able to reassure his supporters and his party that he's the man to take this fight to donald trump in november. but it also happens in this international context which

feels like, i mean, it feels like it's a powder keg. it feels like we're at, you know, we're at like the beginning of world war i, we're like one assassination in europe away from all the dominos falling. >> that's absolutely what keeps me up at night. and i'm sure all of us. i don't think any of us are sleeping. thank god for professional hair and makeup to look decent on tv. nicolle, talk about this from somebody who has dealt closely with a president. president biden not only has to assuage his own party's fears, but also those of those nato allies. they're here watching the american media care more about how aged he looks than about the guy playing golf with viktor orban. like, i wonder just how the world sort of is kind of viewing us in this moment when this is the fight that we're having rather than the collective fight to save the west. >> you know, anne applebaum and

evelyn farkas has offered me just about everything i'll borrow in terms of my understanding of what this week has been like from their perspective. and both of them have articulated this real fatalistic feeling that they read the polls. they probably follow american politics more closely than many americans and they believe trump's election is inevitable. i think when we look at this political moment instead of focusing on what's icky, what democrats are -- and no one has a decision to make except one guy and it sounds like maybe his family is in the room with him. that's joe biden. i think the audience tonight is joe biden to joe biden. because he's the only person with his hands on the wheel. he is the first person, his family is the first family that would be targeted with the kinds of political prosecutions donald trump is running on and has promised and his allies have promised. he has the most to lose. if he makes a decision that leads to the re-election of donald trump, polls suggest that

the house and senate would be long gone as well. we know maga controls the supreme court. so the person who has everything riding on how he does tonight is the president himself. i don't know that there will be a press conference in history with more people trying to sort of -- i feel like physically rowing with him and for him, for all the reasons you and rachel were talking about. it's not just a domestic political decision that has consequences here. it's a global determination about whether the leader of the free world will sit atop an axis ovautocracy or democracy. >> i guess that's why this is so stressful. it's because this is not about joe biden's political legacy and future alone. this is literally about whether we'll ever have another election. this is about whether his family and any family in this country will be jailed for opposing the president of the united states. the supreme court has made it

clear they will not protect us. no one can protect us but the voters, but the only people not speaking are the voters. it's a lot of intellectuals and politicians and people trying to figure out what the best thing to do is, but what makes it so fraught is the only people who will decide are voters, the people who right now are silent. >> yeah, and you know, i do think that it is worth appreciating the fact, as i think nicolle was alluding to, that the process going on within the democratic party and on the democratic side, i think is a good faith process that doesn't mean that it is not incredibly heated. and incredibly impassioned and just emotional and it's, you know, so high stakes but it is good faith in the sense that i do think the democratic party is united around the imperative of defeating donald trump in the election in november. i don't think there is anybody on any side of this fight in the democratic party who doesn't

have that as their north star. really. like there's no one. and given that, given that it is just a matter of trying to forecast what the best approach is to that fight, what the best candidate is, what the best campaign is, whether or not president biden as an incumbent is the one who should do it or whether or not he should pass the torch to somebody else and they should do it. it's a how, not why. and that is a fight that honestly it's a privilege to be covering it. it's a privilege in some ways to be part of it because everybody who is covering it in some ways is part of it because this is actually the democratic party trying to save country and in some ways trying to save the world and doing so in a way that has all of the passion and all of the emotion and all of the high stakes negotiation that a decision that difficult deserves. and so i don't -- people who are saying that, oh, this is a mess. the democratic party is being so messy. none of this should happen in public. this has to happen in public to

a certain extent. this fight has to happen. it does have to end at some point, but the fight is happening for the right reasons. the fight is happening to try to save the country. >> yeah, but you know, nicolle, leave it to the democrats, as somebody who used to be aligned with the other party, leave it to the democrats to do that in public. democrats are the only party i can think of who would do all the things rachel so brilliantly said, but do it in front of everybody on their front porch, as messy as possible, as disorganized as they could possibly do it and in the same way that has caused a lot of black democrats to scratch their heads and say what is wrong with these people? why does the other side back a felon and adjudicated rapist and their side is beating up our guy and highlighting a person you have been highlighting on your show, kamala harris. vice president harris literally was voted by some 16 million primary voters not once but twice, and 80 million voters to

be next in line to the presidency. and yet people are going, i wonder if she could do it. she's already in line to do it, man. >> yeah, well, i mean, i think she's already doing it. she's had an electric week on the campaign trail, on the stump, and on the rope line. a lot of them have been happening in my hours. i want to say something that rachel just said that i love. it is a privilege to cover this moment. the reason the democrats are doing it in public, i'll say this as a sort of refugee in the democratic coalition is because they're better. they're better. if it wasn't transparent, it would be suspect. i know how angry our viewers are at me for covering the story, how triggered they are by the stories, but the stories are in the aim of saving the country from donald trump, saving this great democracy from autocracy. i think that the love that people have for joe biden extends to an expectation that he'll be part of the project of

saving democracy. i don't think it's a mistake for nancy pelosi to go out and try to give him another minute to reconsider his decision because it has massive, massive implications. >> i agree. i think that everyone is in the right -- is coming from the right end goal. and i think, you know, the question now is just what's happening in the minds and in the minds of the one guy who actually gets to make this decision, and that is joe biden and the people closest to him. please stick with me for just one moment. i want to bring in nbc news white house correspondent mike memoli who is at the walter e. washington convention center awaiting the news conference. where is biden right now in terms of this decision making? i know he sent a letter saying he made the decision, but nancy pelosi kept asking, so let's ask again. has he decided for sure what he's going to do? >> well, you're right, joy. president biden has been as clear as he can be that he has made his decision, that he is

staying in this race. but all week we have been hearing from especially democrats on capitol hill, that they want to let the president make this decision. perhaps they just don't like the decision that he's made at this point. but let's talk about how we got to this point. two weeks ago exactly, right now, we were previewing what we were calling a high-stakes consequential debate. this was largely on the biden campaign's terms. they picked the date, they picked the format. they picked the network that was going to air this debate. we know what happened. the president failed to show up. and the president has acknowledged what he called a bad night. since then, we have seen the president in a fight for his political life. one thing we have heard so often is president biden and some of his closest allies including the first lady saying we're not going to let a 90-minute debate overshadow 3 1/2 years of accomplishment. i think you can also say that the president is not going to let a 90-minute debate performance rush him into a decision about ending a 52-year career in national politics. i have been saying this for the better part of the past week, the president is 100% in until

he's 100% out. they know the stakes of this moment, how closely president biden is being watched by not just the entire country but especially by some of those voices, especially in leadership on capitol hill, who could potentially have that come to jesus moment, bring to the president the voice of the entire party that they do not believe he can continue serving this party as the nominee. so the question really is, does tonight matter? have the decisions already be made on the part of congressional democrats that they believe his campaign is insalvageable. some of his closest adviser went to capitol hill today, they met with a group of senate democrats to lay out what they said is still their path forward. it's unclear if they were convinced they have that path. >> quick follow-up for you, mike. this has been a long day for the 81-year-old president. has he gotten rest today? what's been the preparation for this? there was some thinking that he was overprepared for the debate, that there was too much done, that the team kind of worked him

too hard before the debate and he wasn't well. what's the status today? >> well, think about what was one of the excuses for his poor debate performance, that he perhaps rushed into that debate after too much time overseas, a long trip, and too much prep, frankly, among some of those who he was with in the week leading up to it. this has been a very long day and i have been talking to people close to the president. he cares so much about foreign policy, about what was accomplished at this nato summit, you wonder how much time they had to walk through the various questions we're posing to him. we'll find out shortly. >> mike memoli, thank you so much. much appreciated. let me go back to rachel and nicolle. really quick, if you were in a position of having to prepare the president for this, i mean, he was the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee. foreign polly is his thing, he had a bit of trouble today mixing up putin and volodymyr zelenskyy's names, but how would you have prepared him? >> i mean, look, i sat across

from him. you know, we didn't have any plans about what we would discuss. it was news of the day, the supreme court had just rendered a now typically terrible decision. we talked about the news. he should talk about what he's been doing. i think he's going to field questions about his candidacy, and i worked for george bush and sarah palin. i don't give political advice on tv or in private, but i think that what he -- he really is in a sort of moment that is so consequential and so big, he should keep his own counsel. i have heard both stories, i have heard he was overprepared, underprepared, i heard he was tired, he was sick. he should stick to it and hope to get it out tonight. >> rachel, you are so great at finding an historical analog that actually comforts me because it lets me know we have come through horrible things before and we can make it. is there one to this kind of a situation that you can think of with a previous president? you're giving me the hard no.

rachel is giving me the no. i don't know if i have ever gotten that from rachel. oh, no. >> i don't mean to be the bearer of bad news here. i mean, listen, there are parallels, in the sense that, listen, the last time we had the same two candidates from each major party running against each other in two successive elections was 1956, eisenhower versus stevenson, which was exactly what it was in '52. when eisenhower was going to run against that same guy from the other party in '56, his whole party was worried he was too old. in '55, he had a terrible heart attack and had been hospitalized. in june of '56, he had emergency stomach surgery and had to be hospitalized and the was on top of everybody already thinking he was too old. and then, even with all of those health troubles, he went on to beat stevenson by more than he beat him in 1952. and so, i mean, so yeah, there

are parallels. there's also a parallel on the other side of that race. stevenson thought one of the big weaknesses for ike is ike had a vice president who the democrats really thought was unpopular. ike's vice president was richard nixon. they thought he was really easy to caricature and an easy candidate. they wanted to focus attention on richard nixon as the understudy to this old and sometimes ill president. and the democrats did a stunt in order do that. at the 1956 convention, they held an open convention to choose the vice presidential running mate for stevenson, thinking that would give them a boost of energy. yeah, i'm sure it gave them a boost of energy, but they got shellacked in november. i mean, it's not that these sorts of domestic political considerations have not been weighed by the electorate before. this is the sort of thing that has happened in some ways in some elections before. i just don't know that that history is predictive. it does mean we have confronted these measures before.

it does mean that concerns about the health and age of a presidential incumbent is a real thing. this is not something that was invented to undermine joe biden. this is something that other presidents have had to contend with too. but the stakes right now, with the largest land war in europe since world war ii under way with the president who is saying i will be charles lindbergh, i will switch our side and put us on the other side of the war if i win, i mean, there aren't stakes like that. there are in fiction but not in real life. >> it's sort of nightmarish, but i have to say atlee stevenson, second only to estys cefarber. i feel like he was nominated or tried so much, but poor atlee, he had dreams. >> never got there. >> the other thing i will note, and correct me if i'm wrong, rachel. this was the era when it was a

lot easier because there wasn't a popular referendum that matters. this is when the party really did do the smoke-filled room and go behind closed doors and choose who it was going to be. both parties would have loved to have ike. >> when nicolle was talking about how democrats doing this in public is because democrats are doing this earnestly and for all the right reasons. it's also because democrats lost the key to the smoke-filled room. they aren't well organized enough. there's a smoke-filled room somewhere. >> if there's a smoke-filled room, democrats will lose the key and forget where the room is because they're just disorganized. >> i would say that's better. that's why everyone wants in. that's why everyone wants in the pro-democracy coalition. that's why you have the herding of cats going on. >> it's the diversity. the diversity and the equity and inclusion. that's what we love. let's keep these ladies on hold

for one more moment. i want to bring in david plouffe, former obama campaign manager and white house senior adviser. you know this man, what he's capable of. you know his upupsides, his downsides. it's hard to say what do you expect because we expected something different from what we got in the debate, but what do you think would be helpful if he could accomplish tonight? >> well, joe biden knows the stakes better than anyone, so i would say a poor performance is going to accelerate democratic officials and voices calling for him not to run. i think an average performance probably is status quo. if he were somehow to deliver the kind of performance that looks like he could come back, and that's where i'm focused. you talked about the stakes. they're enormous. so this race has to be won. and right now, we're losing. and so we need a candidate who can dig out of that hole. you know, win wisconsin, win pennsylvania, win michigan. when you have 80% of the country saying that they're worried about your fitness and your

approval rating is at 32%, you have a long way to go. doesn't mean it can't be done, but we only have about 80 days until ballots start going out. so i think he needs to be strong and forceful. he's obviously going to talk about nato where i'm sure he did an amazing job and the difference between trump and he could not be more, but he also has to lay the case out against trump. i don't think he himself has ever talked about project 2025. and give people confidence because right now, you see that there's senate candidates, house candidates in the states getting their own polls back. i think that's where so much of the panic is coming from because this isn't just a presidential race. you give donald trump a republican trifecta with the supreme court that he controls where he might be able to then appoint two younger supreme court justices, that would define this country for decades, this race has to be won. i think that's the question democrats are asking, can joe biden do it? the joe biden of 2020 could have done it, the joe biden of 2012

could have done it, but i learned in politics, who you are is not who you were. i think people want to see, do you have what it takes over the coming weeks to dig out from the hole he's in right now. >> right, and if you actually do the work, the presidency is the job that probably ages you more than any other job in the world. it's a very difficult job. i mean, there is a reason that donald trump basically looked the same at the end. he basically played golf for four years. he didn't do the work, but president biden did. even president obama aged a lot in the office. and so he's not going to get any younger. and so i mean i guess the question then would be what is the leverage that democrats even have? there isn't that i have been able to find, i have had people send me the rules. i haven't seen anything in the rules that gives congressional democrats any leverage over the president. he alone has to make the decision. he's the one with almost 3900 delegates. he has more than he needs, but the formal delegate allocation process does not take place

until about a week from now, july 21st. until that moment, anything but joe biden being on this ticket is an open convention, which i think everyone agrees would be a disaster. some people seem to think it would be fun, but that doesn't seem to be a wise choice another. there are a lot of people saying he should leave the race, but not explaining how he would do it and how the delegates would be passed over presumably to the vice president, but to someone else, i think that sounds insane. >> joy, first of all, this has to be part of the calculation. i think the country and the world owes joe biden a debt of gratitude for winning the race in 2020 and he's been a remarkable president. if this election were purely based on who does the best job with their allies, who can work with the other party to pass legislation. joe biden would win in a land slide. there's a performative aspect to the presidency, and we can wish it weren't so, and that's where

he's being penalized. right now, joe biden is saying he's going to be the candidate. the parlor game about the alternative, we should pay less attention to that until that's reality. at the end of the day, if he were to say i'm proud of my presidency. i decided i'm not going to seek the nomination. i have important work to continue, my guess is what he would say is warm things about vice president harris, but i think vice president harris would be the first to tell you let's let anybody run who wants to run and have the delegates decide. in any scenario where joe biden is not the nominee, it's almost a certainty that it's kamala harris. we have seen she had a great week out there. at the end of the day, i'm a little worried there's some narrative used by people that are defending the president, people should defend the president, but saying well, if not him, she can't win. and we don't know that. there's risked on both sides. it's risky to stay the course, it's risky to change. where i come down is i would

rather have more of a fighting chance than little to no chance. i think if joe biden is able to get off the mat, he might show people he has a chance, but i may not know a lot in life, i know battleground states and what it takes for a democrat to win them, and we're not in a good position right now. that has to change and change quickly. >> that is sobering news but i think it's important to keep it real. david, don't go too far away. i want to bring in cornell belcher, pollster and msnbc political analyst. he's right here with me at the table. here's the thing that i think for a lot of black democrats, we're going to keep it real, feels disrespectful. i think people feel that, you know, the vice president was already, you know, elected with president biden. and she also was on those ballots for these primaries. some 16 million people voted. it doesn't seem conceivable you could skip her for someone else. is that conceivable to you that if for whatever reason president

biden decided not to do it, it wouldn't be vice president kamala harris who becomes the nominee? >> it would be suicide. and i don't often disagree with my old boss, david plouffe, but i don't think it's naturally her. i think there's a lot of democrats in that smoky room that we can't find who are saying they actually don't want it to be her. and willing to put up a fight against her. i tell you this, joy, on national television, democrats fighting the first woman of color to be the vp and her opportunity to get that nomination, democrats fighting her over that would be absolute suicide and would be absolutely devastating to the base of the party and for a lot of younger black and brown voters. so look, i hope that it's right, that if he does decide he's going to go, it naturally goes to vp harris but from what i'm hearing there a lot of people saying we're not going to let

her have it that easily. >> that's what i'm hearing as well. there is a very ugly kind of fight happening behind the scenes in which there are people who would like to keep it from her and there is a fight among black democrats to really consolidate those delegates if in fact it's not president biden. that is what i'm hearing, that there is a really vociferous attempt to make sure she would get it because of what i heard when i was in new orleans, which is that black democrats first of all are standing by joe biden and weren't impacted by the debate. they don't think he's not the right candidate anymore, but they would also be insulted. >> what i say is he has a strong record and she has a strong record as well. look, i am bothered today, a day where nato is strong and our inflation is showing signs of slowing and the fed is talking about maybe we do lower interest rates and our economy is beginning to move in the right direction and the prime minister of the uk is saying what a great

job the president is doing, we're talking about his age. >> and rick wilson said it yesterday, every day you're not taking a 2 x 4 to donald trump, you're losing. here comes president biden. let's take a listen. >> thank you. please be seated. well, good evening. we just concluded this year's nato summit. and the consensus among the members is it was a great success. especially momentous because it represented the 75th year, the most important military defense alliance in the world, the history of the world. we should never forget that nato grew out of the wreckage of world war ii. the most destructive war in history. the idea was to create an alliance of free and democratic nations that would commit themselves to a compact of collective defense, standing together, they knew we would all

be safer. an attack on one would be treated as an attack on all, and it's worked because a would-be aggressor knows if they attack one of us, they'll be attacked by all of us. sending that message is the best way to deter aggression and prevent wars in the first place. for those who thought nato's time had passed, they got a rude awakening when putin invaded ukraine. some of the oldest and deepest fears in europe roared back to life. because once again, a murderous mad man was on the march. but this time, no one cowered in appeasement, especially the united states. we collected intelligence that russia was planning to invade ukraine months before the invasion. i directed the intelligence community to have a significant amount of intelligence to be declassified so i could build a

coalition to oppose the invasion. then in february, some of you remember, i warned the world that the invasion was imminent. i ralied the coalition of 50 nations to help ukraine defend itself. many foreign policy experts thought as putin amassed russian forces just 100 miles north of kyiv, the capitol of ukraine, putin thought it was the home of russia. the capital would fall in less than a week. but the ukrainian people backed by a coalition that helped build stopped them. today, kyiv still stands. and nato stands stronger than it has ever been. during the week of this summit, several heads of states made it a point in their statements to thank the united states and to thank me personally for all that nato has achieved. nato is not only stronger, nato

is bigger because we led the charge to bring in finland and sweden into the alliance. and it makes a gigantic difference. excuse me. meanwhile, my predecessor has made it clear he has no commitment to nato. he's made it clear that he would feel no obligation to honor article 5, he's already told putin, and i quote, do whatever the hell you want. in fact, the day after putin invaded ukraine, here's what he said. it was genius. it was wonderful. some of you forgot that, but that's exactly what he said. but i made it clear a strong nato is essential to american security. and i believe the obligation of article 5 is sacred. and i will remind all americans, article 5 is invoked only once in nato's long history, and that was to defend america after 9/11. i made it clear that i will not

bow down to putin. i will not walk away from ukraine. i will keep nato strong and that's exactly what we did and exactly what we'll continue do. now, the future of american policy is up to the american people. this is much more than a political question. it's more than that. it's a national security issue. don't reduce this to the usual testament that people talk about, issues being a political campaign. it's far too important. it's about the world we live in for decades to come. every american wants to ask herself or himself is the world safer with nato? are you safer? is your family safer? i believe the american people know the answer to all those questions is yes. and i believe the american people understand that america

is stronger, stronger because of our alliances. i believe the american consensus from truman to reagan to me still holds today. america cannot retreat from the world. we must lead the world. we're an indispensable nation, as madeleine albright wrote. let me turn to three other key issues. just this morning we had a great economic report showing inflation is down. overall prices fell last month. core inflation is the lowest it's been in three years. prices are falling for cars, appliances, and air fares. grocery prices have fallen since the start of the year. we're going to keep working to take down corporate greed to bring those prices down further. meanwhile, trump's calling for a 10% tariff on everything american's buy including food from overseas, vegetables, and other necessities.

and economists tell us that would cost the average american working family another $2,500 a year, a tax of $2,500 a year. second, our southern border is working. after trump killed the bipartisan effort to secure the border, republicans and democrats had worked on, because he thought it would benefit me and make him a loser, republicans walked away. so i took executive action last month. as a consequence, working with mexico, border encounters have gone down over 50%. the current level is lower today than when trump left office. third, for months, the united states has been working to secure a cease-fire in gaza. to bring the hostages home. to create a path for peace and stability in the middle east.

six weeks ago, i laid out a detailed plan in writing. it was endorsed by the u.n. security council, the g-7, that framework is now agreed on by both israel and hamas. so i sent my team to the region to hammer out the details. these are difficult, complex issues. there are still gaps to close. we're making progress. the trend is positive, and i'm determined to get this deal done and bring an end to this war which should end now. let me conclude where i began. we're the united states of america. we are the indispensable nation. our leadership matters, our partnerships matter. this moment matters. we must rise to meet it. with that, i'll take your questions. i have been given a list of people to call on here.

reuters, jeff mason. >> mr. president, your political future has hung over the nato summit a little bit this week. speaker pelosi made a point of suggesting that your decision on whether to stay in the race was still open. george clooney and a handful of lawmakers have called on you to step aside. reuters is reporting tonight that uaw leadership is concerned about your ability to win. >> uaw just endorsed me but go ahead. >> thank you. my question for you is how are you incorporating these developments into your decision to stay? and separately, what concerns do you have about vice president harris' ability to beat donald trump if she were at the top of the ticket? >> look, i wouldn't have picked vice president trump to be vice president if i thought she wasn't qualified to be president. let's start there. number one.

the fact is that the consideration is that i think i'm the most qualified person to run for president. i beat him once. and i will beat him again. secondly, the idea, i served in the senate for a long time. the idea that senators and congressmen running for office worry about the ticket is not unusual. and i might add, there are at least five presidents running or incumbent presidents who had lower numbers than i have now. later in the campaign. so there's a long way to go in this campaign. and so i'm just going to keep moving. keep moving, and because look, i got more work to do. we have more work to finish. there's so much -- we made so much progress. think about it. think about where we are

economically versus the rest of the world. name me a world leader who wouldn't want to change places with our economy. we created over 800,000 manufacturing jobs. so things are moving. we got more to go. working class people still need help. corporate greed is still at large. the corporate profits have doubled since the pandemic. they're coming down. that's why i'm optimistic about where things are going. danny kemp, afp. >> thanks. thank you, mr. president. i wanted to ask you about your -- you mixed up presidents zelenskyy and putin earlier today. and you now have sort of you key allies including the british prime minister, the president of france, having to step in and make excuses for you. officials here are saying off

the record your decline has become noticeable. hasn't this now frankly become damaging for america's standing in the world? >> did you see any damage in my leading this conference? have you seen a more successful conference? what do you think? and the putin piece, i was talking about putin and i said now at the very end. i said putin -- no, i'm sorry. zelenskyy. and then i had five other names. look, guys, the idea anybody suggests that we haven't had an incredibly successful conference, how many times did you hear in that conference, i know it sounds too self serving, but other leaders, heads of state, thanking me saying the reason we're together is because of biden. because biden did the following. look, folks, this is -- well,

anyway. i thought it was the most successful conference i have attended in a long time, and find me a world leader who didn't think it was. next one. nancy cordas, cbs. >> thank you, mr. president. you mentioned other instances in history where presidents have faced a challenge. but what makes this moment in history so unique is it is not your enemies who are calling on you to reconsider your decision to stay in the race. it's your friends, supporters, people who thought you have done a great job over the past four years. have you spent time thinking about what it would mean for your legacy which you have worked decades to build if you stay in the race despite the concerns that voters say they have, and you lose to someone who you yourself have argued is unfit to return to the oval office? >> look, i'm not in this for my legacy. i'm in this to complete the job

i started. as you recall, understandably, many of you and many economists thought my initial initiatives i put forward can't do that, it's goes going to cause inflation, debt is going to go up. what are you hearing now from mainstream economists? 16 economic nobel laureates said i have done a hell of a job. under my plan, so far, and what's going to happen in the future if i am re-elected, that things are going to get much better. our economy is growing. i was determined when i got elected to stop the trickle-down economic theory that if the wealthy did well, everybody else would do well. my dad was a well read decent guy. i don't remember much trickling down on his kitchen table. middle class people and working class people need help. what happened is i decided to implement, was able to implement

as president what i believed when i was a senator. that is that the way to build this economy is from the middle out and the bottom up. that way, we grow the economy, and the wealthy still do very well. they do fine. and guess what? find me a mainstream economist who says we haven't done well. what have we not done that isn't working now? so we have more to do. we have to finish the job. and by the way, i come from the corporate state of the world, delaware has more corporations, you know, registered in delaware than any other state in the nation combined. i'm not anti-corporate, but corporate profits have doubled since the pandemic, doubled. it's time for things to get back in order a little bit. time, for example, if i'm re-elected, we're going to make sure that rents are kept at 5% increase, corporate rents for apartments and the like and homes are limited to 5%.

we're going to make a lot of changes that i have been talking about because we're going to continue to grow this economy, and by the way, i know, remember how i got so roundly criticized for being so pro-union, not labor, union. union. well, guess what. i have been the most pro union labor president in history, not a joke. and guess what. we had the treasury department do a study. when unions do better, everybody does better. everybody does better. and we talk about how, for example, when i -- remember when we talked about beginning the computer chip industry back in the united states. used to be 40% of the industry. we invented the chip. 40% of the industry was in the united states, and former presidents decided the best way to do it was to find the cheapest labor in the world, send the product over there and import what the product was. and so what did i do? i was told not to go over to europe, i mean to asia,

including europe, but asia. and i remember going to south korea. convincing them to invest $20 billion in the united states to build computer chip factories. and i asked why when they finally decided to do it. and the answer was, because you have the safest economy in the world, and you have the best workers in the world. so the whole idea here is we have invested -- there's over $50 billion in investment in computer chip manufacturing just coming into being. none of you thought that would happen. none of you thought that would happen. but it's happening. it's happening. and it's going to grow economies. all -- and by the way, red states and blue states. manufacture as much in red states as blue states. so my generic point is that the idea that we can't continue to build and grow the economy, make it fair, like i said, from my

standpoint, when the middle class does well, that's when the whole economy grows. the poor have a shot, the wealthy do well. the wealthy have to start paying their taxes. >> that's the problem, sir. you mentioned your vice president, kamala harris, would be ready to serve on day one. can you elaborate on that? what is it about her attributes and accomplishments over the last four years that make her ready to serve on day one if necessary? >> first of all, the way she's handled the issue of freedom of women's bodies, secondly, her ability to handle almost any issue on the board. this was a hell of a prosecutor. she was a first-rate person and in the senate she was really good. i wouldn't have picked her unless i thought she was qualified to be president from the very beginning. i made no bones about that. she's qualified to be president. and that's why i picked her.

felicia schwartz, financial times. >> thank you, mr. president. presidency is the most straining job in the world, and it's 24/7. how can you say you'll be up for that next year, in two years, in four years given the limits you acknowledge you have today? >> the limits i have acknowledged i have? >> there's been reporting that you have acknowledged you need to go to bed earlier and end your evening around 8:00. >> that's not true. look. what i said was instead of my everyday starting at 7:00 and going to bed at midnight, it would be smarter for me to pace myself more. i said, for example, the 8:00, 7:00, 6:00 stuff, instead of starting a fund-raiser at 9:00, start at 8:00. people get to go home by 10:00. that's what i'm talking about. i'm not talking about -- if you looked at my schedule since i made that stupid mistake in the

debate, i mean, my schedule has been full bore. i have done -- where has trump been? riding around in his golf cart, filling out his scorecard before he hits the ball. look, he's done virtually nothing. and i have i don't know how many, don't hold me to it, roughly 20 major events, some with thousands of people showing up. so i just think it's better. i always have an inclination whether i was playing sports or doing politics, just to keep going. i just have to pace myself a little more. pace myself. and the next debate i'm not going to be traveling into 15 time zones the week before. anyway. that's what it was about. that's what it was about. and by the way, even with that, i love my staff. but they add things.

they add things all the time. i'm catching hell from my wife. anyway. i'm sorry. zeke miller, associated press. >> thank you, mr. president. two questions for you. first, on the nato summit, president zelenskyy and your meeting with him, he pressed you to lift your limitations on the ukrainian use of american weapons, saying in the public remarks afterward that ukraine cannot win the war unless those limitations are lifted. are you reconsidering your position on that? secondly, following up on felicia's question, leaders of your own party have said that they are not worried about that debate. they're worried about the next bad night and the bad night after that. how can you reassure the american people that you are up to the task and that there won't be more bad nights at the debate stage or somewhere else?

>> first thing about zelenskyy asking for the ability to strike deep into russia. we have allowed zelenskyy to use american weapons in the near term, in the near broad into russia. whether or not he should be -- for example, zelenskyy, he's not. if he had the capacity to strike moscow, strike the kremlin, would that make sense? it wouldn't. the question is, what's the best use of the weaponry he has and the weaponry we're getting to him. i have gotten him more long range capacity as well as defensive capacity. and so our military is working. i'm following the advice of my commander in chief -- the chief of staff of the military as well as the secretary of defense and our intelligence people.

and we're making a day-to-day basis on how far they should go in. that's the logical thing to do. second question related to -- >> bad nights, sir. how can you reassure the american people you won't have more bad nights whether they be on a debate stage or a matter of foreign policy? >> i tell you what, the best way to assure them is the way i assure myself. that is, am i getting the job done? am i getting the job done? can you name me somebody who has gotten more major pieces of legislation passed in 3 1/2 years? i created 2,000 jobs just last week. so if i slow down, i can't get the job done. there is no indication of that. none. what do i got here.

merrick. here. merrick. >> thank you, mr. president, how are you? >> i'm well. >> the elections in the u.s. have consequences around the world. you have pretty high standing in europe. i just ask president macron about you and he said we are happy to have him as the president of the united states. but there is a concern many people in poland across europe are worried that the former president may win the election. and there is a lot of concern that donald trump may weaken nato, stop supporting ukraine, or push ukraine to give up territories to russia. >> they are correct >>and you, yourself, was warning just two minutes ago

about it. so my question is, do you think that europe will beleft on its own if donald trump -- be left on its own if donald trump wins the election? what is your advice to european leaders to prepare for possible u.s. disengagement? >> well, look i think -- how can i say this without sounding too self--serving. i am not handing my european allies coming up to me saying joe don't run, what i hear them say is, you got to win. you can't let this guy come forward. it will be a disaster. it will be a disaster. i mean, i think he said in one of his rallies, don't hold me to this, nato, i just learned about nato or something to that effect.

foreign policy is never his strong point. and, he seems to have an a finnity to people who are author athoritarian. that worries europe and po land, no one thinks in he wins in ukraine he will stop in ukraine that it will be the end of it. what i can say is. i think i am the best qualified person to do the job. to make sure ukraine does not fall, that ukraine succeeds and nato stays strong. and if you recall no one was talking about finland joining nato. i remember talking to put at geneva and he was talking about what we should do in eastern europe and et cetera. i said you are looking for the

ukraine you will get the natoizeation of finland and about four weeks later i got a call -- that is not true, probably five months later, the president of finland would come to see me in my office. i invited him to the oval office and we sat down ask talked and he wanted to join nato and could i help, i did. it was not automatic. and then i got a call to the swedes. >> i beg your pardon? [ inaudible question ] >> and finland, joined nato. 800 mile border is significant and they are already allies but they were not part of nato and you heard, i think you heard i can't recall in the closed meeting but he would not mind it being repeated he said we decided. the people of finland decided they had to be part of nato.

it was in their interest because of the joint ability to be together. just to suede any attack on finland. and the same thing with sweden. it took a lot of selling to some folks particularly in turkey and other places to agree to the expansion. but it expanded and we are a hell of a lot stronger because of it, more secure because of it. and by the way, i was able to get 50 other nations, 50, 5-0, to support ukraine. 50, and we were able to bring about a coalition of europe and asia. japan and south korea. i just met, we talked about the relationship between australia, new zealand, japan, south korea, united states. we are making the world safer and stronger because we have to

deal with a new arrangement that exists in the word. the cold war is over, the postwar era is over, what is going to replace it? and i respectfully suggest, i have a pretty idea what it should be. i convinced a lot of people to follow it, we are just going to get stronger. david sanger. >> thank you, mr. president. >> be nice, david. [ laughter ] >> mr. president, the nato declaration that was issued yesterday, it was notable because it described china as a enabe ler ofler in the war of ukraine. it is a partnership that cemented in place in the past two or three years. i think one that you were a

little doubtful of when we asked but it some time ago. i would be interested to know if you have a strategy now of trying to interrupt the partnership between china and russia. and whether or not in a second term you would pursue that if you could describe that strategy to us. and along the way could you tell us if you think just to follow up on feli krrk ia's question, if you were in the room with putin again like three years ago or president xi, or a few years from now you can negotiate them, handle them one-on-one. >> well, the first part of your question, is we discussed and i raised in the nato summit and others raised, the future of china's involvement. what they are going to do. what they are doing with russia

in terms of accommodating, facilitating, not supplying weapon themselves, they are supplying mechanisms for them to be able to get weapon and china's position is basically and i spent more time with xi jinping than any royal leader has over 90 hours since vice president and all of the way through, by the way i handed in all of my notes, but my point is that xi believes that china is a large enough market that they can entice any country including european countries to invest there in return for commitments from europe to do a, b, c and d or not to do certain things. what has happened is, we had a long discussion about what we can not, we have to make clear, china has to understand, that

if they are supplying russia with information in capacity along with working with north korea and others to help russia in armorment that they are not going to benefit economically as a consequence by getting the kind of investment they are looking for. so, for example, we are in a situation where re-established direct contact with china remember after the balloon going down all of a sudden things came to an end. well we set up a new mechanism. there is a direct line between xi and me and our military has direct access to one another and they contact one another when we have problems. the issue is that we have to make sure that xi understands there is a price to pay for undercutting both the

pacific basin as well as europe as it relates to russia and dealing with ukraine. and so, if you want to invest in klinea, as you know, you know this area really well, you want to invest in china you have to get a 51% chinese owner, you have to make sure you do by their rules and you don't have the authority, you have to provide all access to all of the data and information that you have. there was awhile there as you recall, with the last administration and other administrations where the access to the market was enticive enough for companies to come in. they had access to over a billion people in the market, not a billion but a lot of people in the market. and, so they were doing it. but got curtailed when we started saying we are going to play by the same rules, for

example, the idea